[Internal-cg] Publication of proposal finalization process
kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com
Sat Dec 20 09:16:46 UTC 2014
I did ask you some question about the scope and conditions of famous "
Stress Test " that everybod talks about these days
2014-12-20 8:53 GMT+01:00 Patrik Fältström <paf at frobbit.se>:
> > On 20 dec 2014, at 00:27, Alissa Cooper <alissa at cooperw.in> wrote:
> > I think this flexibility is important because some communities may not
> propose any operational changes at all, in which case there really will be
> nothing to “test.”
> Well, while I agree the flexibility is important I do not agree nothing
> has to be tested if nothing is changed. Something is changing, the contract
> between ICANN and NTIA is not extended. And there are a few things in that
> contract that might have impact on operation even if the mechanisms do not
> change. And I think personally that should be tested. But, once again, that
> is up to the communities to decide.
> SSAC have in SAC-069 <
> https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/sac-069-en.pdf> a number of
> recommendations on "things to keep eyes on".
> For example Recommendation 3:
> > Recommendation 3: Each of the communities should investigate and clarify
> the process for handling the possibility of governmental sanctions and
> restrictions (e.g., the protocol for obtaining OFAC2 licenses where U.S.
> sanctions might interfere with the ability to execute proper instructions
> to IANA) following the stewardship transition.
> For that to be possible to evaluate, SSAC also wrote recommendation 7:
> > Recommendation 7: NTIA should clarify the processes and legal framework
> associated with the role of the Root Zone Maintainer after transition.
> For the names community, I think this Recommendation from SSAC is
> important to have a look at, this as SSAC see a difference between "the
> policy" developed by the policy developing processes and "the rules" that
> ICANN as the organisation produce, and then finally "the instructions" IANA
> function at ICANN create, implement and follow. In the case of IETF, IETF
> do indeed write explicit instructions to the IANA function operator while
> it is not as explicit for other communities:
> > Recommendation 2b: Each of the communities should review and (if
> necessary) enhance its policy development process to ensure that all of the
> instructions that it provides to the IANA Functions Operator are clear and
> But once again, all of this is up to the communities to decide.
> Internal-cg mailing list
> Internal-cg at icann.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Internal-cg